DR. KHALID RANJHA, J.- Through this Constitutional petition, declaration is being sought that order dated 25.2.1998 passed by the leamed District and Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura in his capacity as District Chairman Human Rights is coram-non-judice and the proceedings pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura pursuant to the above order are of no consequence.
2. On 25.2.1998, Zafar Mehmood, Ahmad Sher and Wali Ullah (respondents Nos. 1 to 3) moved an application before the District and Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura in his capacity as District Chairman Human Rights, Sheikhupura alleging therein that Warburton Police had registered a case vide FIR No. 9/98 under Sections 11/18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (No. VII of 1979) read with section 354 PPC against Muhammad Ashraf. On his arrest, in the process of "JAMA TALASHI" Rs. 32,000/- were removed from his pocket. Lateran this case was however, cancelled having been found false; but the police declined to return the above said amount of Rs.
32,000/- . Muhammad Ashraf, therefore, lodged a complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police against the S.H.O. Ejaz Ahmad, AS1, Muhammad Afzal, AS1 and Gulzar, F.C. Who marked the same to D.S.P. (HQ). The latter had fixed 13.2.1998 for holding an inquiry.
However, a day earlier i.e. On 12.2.1998 Raza Ullah and Ashraf were watering their fields, they were whisked away by the police, subjected to torture ajld then placed in l0Ck-UD. Muhammad Ashraf was alsn marie Tr. Nm lvlc tVn.mKimpressions on the blank stamp paper. To cover up their arrest a case was also registered vide FIR No. 56/98 under section 188 PPC. On getting a wind of this incident, Naveed Ullah and Wali Ullah brothers of Raza Ullah went to Police Station, Warburton and inquired from the police about the cause of arrest of said Raza Ullah and Muhammad Ashraf. On their entreaties, Raza Ullah was released but the police declined to show a similar favour to Ashraf.
This led to an altercation between the aforesaid brothers of Raza Ullah and the police. In retaliation thereto, the entire police of Warburton Circle got together on the following morning at 5 a.m. And rounded up the houses of Raza Ullah, Naveed Ullah and Wali Ullah (respondent No.3) as well as those of Manzoor Hussain and Ghulam Muhammad and Muhammad Ali. They also raided the dera of Rana Zafar Joiya, Ahmad Sher (respondents Nos. 1 and 2), Shakhawat Mehmood son of Mehmood Khan, Ahmed Sher son of Amir Khan, Muhammad Sarwar son of Shahadat, Ejaz Ahmad son of Ghulam Muhammad, Dr. Imtiaz son of Abdul Hameed, Shah Muhammad son of Ali Gohar, Aftab Ahmad son of Ali Asghar. They scaled over the wall and broke open the doors and thus played havoc with the privacy of their houses. The womenfolk were beaten up and subjected to insulting behaviour. Hafiz Ejaz Ahmad, Muhammad Sarwar, Muhammad Iqbal, Ghulam Muhammad, Manzoor Ahmad, Wali Ullah, Nazir Ahmad and Ilyas were arrested and were subjected to torture. Ornaments of Rs. 8,000/- were removed from the house of Zia Ullah. Similarly from the house of Shah Muhammad, a cable worth Rs. 10,000/- and cash Rs.10,000/- were also taken away by force. A case was also registered under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance No. XX of 1965 against Wali Ullah and Nazir Ahmad.
3. On the receipt of this complaint, the learned Sessions Judge/respondent No. 4 exercising his authority as Chairman Human Rights passed the following orders:- "Very serious allegations have been levelled against some Police Officers. In order to verily the genuineness of the allegation, Rana Zahoor-ul-Haque, ASJ Sheikhupura is directed to make a detailed . Enquiry and submit his report within seven days."
4. The leamed Addl. Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura on being entrusted with the inquiry proceeded to depute the Senior Superintendent of Police, Sheikhupura to ensure the service of all the police officials. They were also directed to submit their written statements and parawise comments.
5. Mr. Shabbar Raza Rizvi, leamed counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 'Nos. 1 to 3 submits that the petition is mis-conceived. He maintains that all the District & Sessions Judges have been vested with the authority to examine the case of Human Rights violation pursuant to the declaration made by the Chief Justices Committee on 14.8.1991 commonly known as Quetta Declaration. It was decided therein that:- "A11 organs of the State as well as all citizens are expected to contribute and actively participate in the enforcement of the Scheme. However, the Bar and especially the statutory organizations thereof shall at as vanguard and main vehicle for the success of the Scheme-the Judiciary providing the necessary umbrella to every one who would strive for it but all in accordance with law and remaining strictly within the Constitutional set-up of Pakistan ( )". (PLD 1991 Journal 126).
He laid a great stress on the wording of the above-referred para of the resolution and maintained that the Committee of the Chief Justices had emphasised that, Judiciary shall provide the necessary umbrella to every-one who would strive for it.
6. It was further argued that the third tier of the Scheme pertained to District level organization. A Board for Awareness and Enforcement of Human Rights and Obligations at the district level was visualized with District and Sessions, Judge as its director. The fourth tier was the Constitution of Committee the Directors main function was set out as follows:- "On information received and/or discovery of any infringement of human rights from any source relating to their area, the committee will immediately take cognizance of the matter and try' to rectify the infringement by all lawful means of persuasion, thereafter if it fails, the committee will, through its bar competent (Lawyers), take appropriate action in existing legal forums e.g. By providing legal and etc."
7. In aid of his submission that Quetta Declaration has the force of law, Mr. Shabbar Raza Rizvi, Advocate, relied on observations made by my learned brother Ihsan-ul-Haq Chaudhry, J. In the Full Bench judgment delivered in commonly known Saima Waheed's case (PLD 1997 Lahore 301) to the effect that:- "We propose that the Government should enact law to provide a detailed machinery in this behalf and in the meanwhile, the petitions may be made to the District Judges of the place where the girl last resided with the parents. This could be done under the Quetta Declaration issued by the Chief Justices Committee on 14.8.1991. The relevant paras reads as under: - "(2) ensure that all citizens, particularly the deprived and unaided sections of the society become conscious and assertive of '''Hr rights and obligations as guaranteed and provided by Islam, the Constitution and the law in order to achieve this objective, to provide an efficient machinery at the door-steps so that they can protect the rights and fulfil the obligations;
(3) x x x x x x x x x Leamed counsel for the petitioner however,- pointed out that the above was just a minority view and could not be described as view of the Court.
8. Mr. Naveed Rasul Mirza, learned Addl. A.G. On the other hand, submits that Quetta Deceleration is just a pious resolve and till date it has not been given effect to by either the Federal or the Provincial Governments. Unless 'Quetta Declaration' is translated into law by the legislature, it can neither be executed nor implemented in a lawful manner. He placed emphasis on the last lines of the above- referred resolution that judiciary would provide an umbrella only in "accordance with law and remaining strictly within un-Constitutional set-up. Meaning thereby that any intervention on the pretext of violation of Human Rights has to be within the frame-work of law.
In the case in hand, it was suggested that the allegations made in the application to the leamed Sessions Judge disclosed the commission of penal offences. Remedy of private complaint, as such, was the more proper course for the respondents.
8. I have heard the ieamed counsel for the parties at consideration length. I do feel the Quetta Declaration is a character of great potential and could prove as a panacea for the miseries and inhuman treatment meted out to the people of this Country. Unfortunately over six years have gone by but no heed has been'paid by the Government to legislate on the lines proposed by the Chief Justices Committee or to set up an infra-structure for its implementation.
9. In the absence of any steps having been taken to implement the "Quetta Declaration", it cannot be held that the leamed Sessions Judges stand vested with any authority by virtue of the said Declaration. The order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura on 25.2.1998 assuming jurisdiction as Chairman Human Rights is thus declared to.Be without lawful authority and the inquiry being conducted by the leamed Addl. Sessions Judge is held to be of no consequence.
10. However, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 cannot be allowed to suffer for an at of default of Court. Their application made to the Sessions Judge, discloses commission of penal offences. The said application is ordered to be transferred to the Court of concerned Judicial Magistrate, who will treat the same as a private complaint and proceed in this behalf expeditiously, keep the leamed Sessions Judge posted with the progress every four weeks.
11. With the above observations, this petition is accepted. There will be no order as to costs.